Topic by Bala Subramaniam
"Have we overstayed where we are ?" Of late we see people changing their jobs too often especially the current generation. Reference to our group and it's 168 members, how about a small survey on how many of us are 10+ years in their current establishments? Hope Pandy can help to create this survey.
Simply put should we now and then rock the smooth sailing boats to land in new treasure islands ? Or should we pitch and roll the way to retire ? What will our kids have to do in a few years to come ? Should they have fixed or pinned base or be on rollers ?
What are the pros and cons of sticking to and hopping across?
Responses
Surya Kolluri
The three operating words for me on this topic are a) exposure, b) risk and c) growth.
Exposure: We live in a globalized world today, and there is no corner of the world that is not touched by another. There is no way to learn about these other worlds by just watching TV or reading magazines. While one must have a home base and have cultural roots, it is valuable to explore other worlds and come back. Even if it is to cherish one's home even more in contrast. (Which leads to a secondary question - what is home? but I will defer that discussion, and just posit that we have an automatic and common understanding of what home is)
Risk: A move should feel like a calculated risk. It need not be to another geography. It can be to another company or another trade or occupation. It could also be to another geography. Such calculated risks are necessary for us to feel alive. The very nature of risk is that the decision might not work. However, having learned from one or two failures that such a risk entails is valuable. More importantly, what is thought of as failure, in later years could have turned out to provide new value that was unforeseen.
Growth: All of life is growth - physical growth, emotional, psychological, spiritual. The entire universe is dynamic. Every cell in our body is dynamic. So why should just we be still?
Having said that, there is a time to roam and there is a time to roost. Each individual and each family will know when to roam and when to roost.
But overall, I fall on the side of strategic, calculated and opportunistic risks to make a move that help us and our families, explore and grow.
Bharani
I think that for the younger generation it is easier to be adventurous and rock their way to new treasure islands.
For family-people, stability, and a certain degree of permanence is needed to take care of kids' education, etc. If both spouses are working, at least one of them should stay put in a permanent position with the kids.
I have been with this same company for 10+ years, but my husband has switched employers 3 times in the same timespan.
Simply put should we now and then rock the smooth sailing boats to land in new treasure islands ? Or should we pitch and roll the way to retire ? What will our kids have to do in a few years to come ? Should they have fixed or pinned base or be on rollers ?
What are the pros and cons of sticking to and hopping across?
Responses
Surya Kolluri
The three operating words for me on this topic are a) exposure, b) risk and c) growth.
Exposure: We live in a globalized world today, and there is no corner of the world that is not touched by another. There is no way to learn about these other worlds by just watching TV or reading magazines. While one must have a home base and have cultural roots, it is valuable to explore other worlds and come back. Even if it is to cherish one's home even more in contrast. (Which leads to a secondary question - what is home? but I will defer that discussion, and just posit that we have an automatic and common understanding of what home is)
Risk: A move should feel like a calculated risk. It need not be to another geography. It can be to another company or another trade or occupation. It could also be to another geography. Such calculated risks are necessary for us to feel alive. The very nature of risk is that the decision might not work. However, having learned from one or two failures that such a risk entails is valuable. More importantly, what is thought of as failure, in later years could have turned out to provide new value that was unforeseen.
Growth: All of life is growth - physical growth, emotional, psychological, spiritual. The entire universe is dynamic. Every cell in our body is dynamic. So why should just we be still?
Having said that, there is a time to roam and there is a time to roost. Each individual and each family will know when to roam and when to roost.
But overall, I fall on the side of strategic, calculated and opportunistic risks to make a move that help us and our families, explore and grow.
Bharani
I think that for the younger generation it is easier to be adventurous and rock their way to new treasure islands.
For family-people, stability, and a certain degree of permanence is needed to take care of kids' education, etc. If both spouses are working, at least one of them should stay put in a permanent position with the kids.
I have been with this same company for 10+ years, but my husband has switched employers 3 times in the same timespan.
Venkat Raghavan
As Pandy mentioned, I am in the roll category. In the last twenty seven or more years, I have worked for four companies - technically speaking, but in the first and the third I changed in just a year. It is the other two companies I stuck to. If I leave or get kicked out of current one of 19 years, I am not sure if I will find another one which gives me the comfortable mat to roll on further. Therein lies the problem of roll. That having said, most in this group are roll category; other than those mentioned by Pandy, Chandru (HAL, UL), Swarna (DRDO), Sriki (ISRO, Bosch) Geetha (ITC, Infosys), Srini (Navy, SIDBI)Sriram (last 20 years in two companies) and others. Most have their last job which is more than 10 years.
But someone who did the rock and who did it superbly, it was Joe. He did it so well, changing Industry and functions (simultaneously sometimes), I used to think, he represented the perfect CEO material for a large multi-business corporation. He did manufacturing, sales, marketing, services and he did it across metallurgical, engineering, materials and IT companies.
So, is the rock better? I think rock is something that gives you great momentum early on career and helps ascend faster, but even rock tends to roll as the career matures; as Joe himself would testify with his longer association with DELL.
The roll can get you in comfort zone. One can get complacent and actually stagnate. But when one does the right thing, is when one is really on the roll. The depth and the connections one makes when one sticks to it makes it possible for someone to gain more in the longer run. I say depth and connections in really a multi-dimensional manner. Beginning with the people, processes in the company, it is the philosophy, the partners, the clients, the market, the complete eco-system. But how does one avoid falling in to the danger of comfort zone and stagnation? (like I am asking myself just now).
I say to myself and the team, if you do the same thing for more than three years, then its time to ask. One needs to have a change of either or the other of position, function, product(s) or market every three years to grow. A market might imply geography (as Bala did), but could be a vertical, or discovery of a new opportunity (like Pandy does now). So keep rocking even as you are in the same organization.
This way you keep the management interested, keep up with the learning curve, and above all keep the vitality of oneself. So, is it only a question of Rock or Roll?
Why not ROCK N ROLL?